Team Extreme LV Cooling?

[patrickjp93]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820313325

 

A friend of mine wants to go with a watercooled CPU and wanted high performance RAM for video rendering. He chose the linked set for a Z97 motherboard and 4790k. He asked me if this was the kind of RAM that required those mini fans some enthusiast boards come with. I had no answer, so I ask the community: does anyone use high-performance RAM and know if this runs hot enough to need those mini fans? My Dad's G.Skill Trident X 2400 MHz doesn't need it apparently, but we're totally unfamiliar with this brand (despite the raving reviews!).

 

Anyone know/have a recommendation?

[ProKoN]

No this kit will not require any additional fans to run proper. 2400mhz memory doesn't yield any real world be benefits other than synthetic benchmarks. The kit you linked is basically the same as gskills 2400mhz kit.

Both kits are very nice. I personally would go for the gskill kit but in reality choose whatever kit you prefer the looks of.

[patrickjp93]

No this kit will not require any additional fans to run proper. 2400mhz memory doesn't yield any real world be benefits other than synthetic benchmarks. The kit you linked is basically the same as gskills 2400mhz kit.

Both kits are very nice. I personally would go for the gskill kit but in reality choose whatever kit you prefer the looks of.

Video rendering is very memory intense (when using a good RAM disk and disabling paging), so there is some actual real world benefit. For gaming I completely agree, but this is one of those use cases.

[ProKoN]

I've done video editing testing with 2400mhz vs 1600 mhz. The difference is negligible. Less than 30 sec difference on a 2gb video file.

[patrickjp93]

I've done video editing testing with 2400mhz vs 1600 mhz. The difference is negligible. Less than 30 sec difference on a 2gb video file.

That's if you don't use a RAM disk. Most capture/render systems shove all the data onto the hard drive while shooting, and the drive becomes the bottleneck. If you use a RAM disk, then you see a difference.

[ProKoN]

Never used a ram disk sorry. Nor have I done any ramdisk validation.

Sata3 ssd is all I need.

[SpecTre12345]

 

2400mhz memory doesn't yield any real world be benefits other than synthetic benchmarks. 

 

Have you actually tried testing this yourself, or are you just going by the bandwagon? Faster memory can really help with minimum framerates in games. But realize it is not just about faster memory, it's also what timings they run at. For instance, your Cas 11 2400MHz kit in your signature has nearly the same latency as a Cas 9 1866MHz kit.

 

RAM SPEED/TIMINGS/AVERAGE FPS /MINIMUM FPS/MAXIMUM FPS)

All tests done in 1080p , all game settings set at maximum unless otherwise noted.

 

HALF-LIFE 2 EPISODE 2 (CPU @ 3.4Ghz, GTX 670 @ Stock Speeds)

1600 6-7-7-19 - 198.5 - 131.8 - 233

1600 9-9-9-24 - 191.3 - 124.9 - 219

1866 8-8-8-24 - 204.1 - 137.7 - 242

2133 9-11-10-27 - 217 - 147.1 - 259

2133 9-10-9-26 - 226 - 154.3 - 266

2360 9-12-10-29 - 231 - 159.7 - 283

 

Half-Life 2 and it's countless derivatives (mods, etc) all seem to be CPU Bound at this point, as I see a perfectly linear relationship between a CPU's speed and FPS.

 

FAR CRY 3 (CPU @ 4.5Ghz, GTX 670 @ 1326/7460)

1600 6-7-7-19 - 52.2 - 26.1 - 93

1600 9-9-9-24 - 50.8 - 24 - 86

1866 8-8-8-24 - 54.1 - 27.9 - 96

2133 9-11-10-27 - 57.4 - 31.1 - 105

2133 9-10-9-26 - 58.7 - 33 - 107

2360 9-12-10-29 - 60.2 - 35.5 - 108

 

The biggest thing with FC3 is the increase in smoothness. The slower memory feels choppy at times, such as when you get into a firefight. The faster memory never has this problem. Also, with 2133 and above, I get zero texture "pop in," yet it's present with lower memory speeds.

 

Heaven Benchmark:

 

DDR3 1600

Min 11 FPS

Avg 54.7 FPS

Max 117.5 FPS

 

DDR3 2133

Min 28.6

Avg 55 FPS

Max 117.7 FPS

[ProKoN]

 

 

 

Have you actually tried testing this yourself, or are you just going by the bandwagon? Faster memory can really help with minimum framerates in games. But realize it is not just about faster memory, it's also what timings they run at. For instance, your Cas 11 2400MHz kit in your signature has nearly the same latency as a Cas 9 1866MHz kit.

 

RAM SPEED/TIMINGS/AVERAGE FPS /MINIMUM FPS/MAXIMUM FPS)

All tests done in 1080p , all game settings set at maximum unless otherwise noted.

 

HALF-LIFE 2 EPISODE 2 (CPU @ 3.4Ghz, GTX 670 @ Stock Speeds)

1600 6-7-7-19 - 198.5 - 131.8 - 233

1600 9-9-9-24 - 191.3 - 124.9 - 219

1866 8-8-8-24 - 204.1 - 137.7 - 242

2133 9-11-10-27 - 217 - 147.1 - 259

2133 9-10-9-26 - 226 - 154.3 - 266

2360 9-12-10-29 - 231 - 159.7 - 283

 

Half-Life 2 and it's countless derivatives (mods, etc) all seem to be CPU Bound at this point, as I see a perfectly linear relationship between a CPU's speed and FPS.

 

FAR CRY 3 (CPU @ 4.5Ghz, GTX 670 @ 1326/7460)

1600 6-7-7-19 - 52.2 - 26.1 - 93

1600 9-9-9-24 - 50.8 - 24 - 86

1866 8-8-8-24 - 54.1 - 27.9 - 96

2133 9-11-10-27 - 57.4 - 31.1 - 105

2133 9-10-9-26 - 58.7 - 33 - 107

2360 9-12-10-29 - 60.2 - 35.5 - 108

 

The biggest thing with FC3 is the increase in smoothness. The slower memory feels choppy at times, such as when you get into a firefight. The faster memory never has this problem. Also, with 2133 and above, I get zero texture "pop in," yet it's present with lower memory speeds.

 

Heaven Benchmark:

 

DDR3 1600

Min 11 FPS

Avg 54.7 FPS

Max 117.5 FPS

 

DDR3 2133

Min 28.6

Avg 55 FPS

Max 117.7 FPS

 

 

I dont game alot. only tested bf4. saw no improvement min\avg\max fps regardless of what the internet had to say about bf4 benefiting from faster memory.  i also game at 3440x1440.

 

I actually prefer synthetic benchmarks because of consistency, gaming benchmarks can be more accurate but also more difficult to replicate.

 

I will run some heaven\ valley tests this week. maybe do a video.

 

I did some video editing evaluation to see what i would benefit from speed or density.

 

16gb vs 32gb (1600MHz) - honestly i saw very little to increase in render times

 

1600mhz vs 2400mhz (16GB) little to no difference in render  times.

 

perhaps im missing something

 

my kit will run at cl10 2400MHz. i typically bench this kit at 2400MHz 10-12-12-12 1T

 

i bought this kit because i like the look and support kingston. the gskill 2400mhz is prolly one of the better kits out there.

[SpecTre12345]

I dont game alot. only tested bf4. saw no improvement min\avg\max fps regardless of what the internet had to say about bf4 benefiting from faster memory.  i also game at 3440x1440.

 

I actually prefer synthetic benchmarks because of consistency, gaming benchmarks can be more accurate but also more difficult to replicate.

 

I will run some heaven\ valley tests this week. maybe do a video.

 

I did some video editing evaluation to see what i would benefit from speed or density.

 

16gb vs 32gb (1600MHz) - honestly i saw very little to increase in render times

 

1600mhz vs 2400mhz (16GB) little to no difference in render  times.

 

perhaps im missing something

 

my kit will run at cl10 2400MHz. i typically bench this kit at 2400MHz 10-12-12-12 1T

 

i bought this kit because i like the look and support kingston. the gskill 2400mhz is prolly one of the better kits out there.

 

Did you make a video of your results or an excel spread of the results with a chart or something? Would probably be beneficial to post those results of you not seeing any improvement in BF4 with faster memory considering there are many individuals who have seen improvements including myself. Would be a nice counter result to those who did see improvements. Maybe there are more factors involved than what we currently know.

 

I know synthetic benchmarks show results for faster memory, but there are other areas where you will see improvements with faster memory. Myself personally, I saw improvements in many different areas from going from 1600MHz memory to 2133MHz just in daily computing. Everything just seems more responsive and snappier compared to slower memory. From startup to shut down. Opening up programs, files, extracting files. Opening up folders (multiple folders). Having multiple tabs open in a Web Browser (opening up more tabs). Opening up Photoshop. The list goes on.

 

I'm surprised about your results with density and rendering considering most people say 32GB is the sweet spot. As far as your results in rendering for higher speed memory, I know CPU speed and number of core and threads are the biggest factors; but what I have read up from a little research is that lower the overall latency of the memory the better results in rendering, so timings have a role to play in it as well. Which is why if you are going for a faster kit of memory, you want to have the lowest possible timings to go along with it otherwise you start to lose the benefits in going to that faster kit in the first place

 

I would honestly see if you can get your kit to do Cas 9, maybe like 9-11-12-31 2T you might see better results that way.

[ProKoN]

Did you make a video of your results or an excel spread of the results with a chart or something? Would probably be beneficial to post those results of you not seeing any improvement in BF4 with faster memory considering there are many individuals who have seen improvements including myself. Would be a nice counter result to those who did see improvements. Maybe there are more factors involved than what we currently know.

 

I know synthetic benchmarks show results for faster memory, but there are other areas where you will see improvements with faster memory. Myself personally, I saw improvements in many different areas from going from 1600MHz memory to 2133MHz just in daily computing. Everything just seems more responsive and snappier compared to slower memory. From startup to shut down. Opening up programs, files, extracting files. Opening up folders (multiple folders). Having multiple tabs open in a Web Browser (opening up more tabs). Opening up Photoshop. The list goes on.

 

I'm surprised about your results with density and rendering considering most people say 32GB is the sweet spot. As far as your results in rendering for higher speed memory, I know CPU speed and number of core and threads are the biggest factors; but what I have read up from a little research is that lower the overall latency of the memory the better results in rendering, so timings have a role to play in it as well. Which is why if you are going for a faster kit of memory, you want to have the lowest possible timings to go along with it otherwise you start to lose the benefits in going to that faster kit in the first place

 

I would honestly see if you can get your kit to do Cas 9, maybe like 9-11-12-31 2T you might see better results that way.

Ive seen those gskill mem chips put up some impressive numbers on hwbot. 2800mhz cl10...oh my. I hit 2800mhz@cl15 lol

 

my mem chips wont do 2400 cl9, i dont think they will do 2133 cl9. not even at 2T. I know they aint the best.

 

funny you say you notice improvements at just general day to day tasks, I really dont. for me 8gb 1600mhz cl9 suffice for daily use.SSD's rock my world.

 

work is slowing down and I will have some time over the Christmas break  to post some results.Im still waiting on patrick to post his DC 5.0GHz results. I got a couple xeons coming my way soon to keep jumpy busy in the meantime. I may even pick up some of those fancy gskill 2400mhz mem chips.

[LogicalDrm]

The ram coolers are just for bling. Even @LinusTech has said so. So is WC on ram.

[SpecTre12345]

Ive seen those gskill mem chips put up some impressive numbers on hwbot. 2800mhz cl10...oh my. I hit 2800mhz@cl15 lol

 

my mem chips wont do 2400 cl9, i dont think they will do 2133 cl9. not even at 2T. I know they aint the best.

 

funny you say you notice improvements at just general day to day tasks, I really dont. for me 8gb 1600mhz cl9 suffice for daily use.SSD's rock my world.

 

work is slowing down and I will have some time over the Christmas break  to post some results.Im still waiting on patrick to post his DC 5.0GHz results. I got a couple xeons coming my way soon to keep jumpy busy in the meantime. I may even pick up some of those fancy gskill 2400mhz mem chips.

 

2800MHz @ CL10 is some nice results. That would have as Cas Latency of 7.14ns. While 2800MHz @ CL15 has a Cas Latency of 10.71ns  same as 1866MHz @ CL10.  

 

Man I would at least think they could do 2133MHz @ Cas 9 @ 2T. That seems kind of crappy, but what are you going to do.

 

To each their own, if you didn't see any improvements nothing you can do about that. Everyone is entitled to their own experience. I will agree that SSD's rocked my world too though.  :lol:

 

Well, when you get some time I would be willing to see your results. If you get a G.Skill 2400MHz kit, shoot for the Cas 9 Trident X kit. I've seen them do 2800MHz @ Cas 10 also, but at 1.75v. They can do 2800MHz @ Cas 11 @ 1.65v though.

[ProKoN]

Yolo

Voltage never bugged me